| Course | NURS 8540 Academic Nursing Faculty Role Development |
|---|---|
| Week | Week 9 |
| Paper type | Discussion post with two peer replies |
| Length | About 620 words, 4 pages |
| Format | Discussion post, APA 7 citations |
| School | Walden University |
| Program | Doctor of Nursing Practice (DNP) |
| Updated | September 2026 |
Free sample paper for NURS 8540 Week 9
Week 9 Discussion: Initial Post
Not a Morale Problem: How Repeated Incivility Among Nursing Faculty Moves Work, Counted Hour by Hour
When faculty treat one another badly, departments tend to file it under morale: unpleasant, regrettable and somebody else's job to soothe. I want to argue that repeated incivility between faculty is better understood as a workload problem, because it moves work from the people involved onto everyone around them. The transfer can be counted.
Consider a composite graduate nursing department in which one senior faculty member regularly dismisses junior colleagues in meetings, criticizes their teaching in front of students and refuses to coordinate on shared courses. A national survey of nursing faculty found that faculty-to-faculty incivility was commonly reported, with behaviors such as demeaning comments, gossip and resisting change, and that it affected work environments and faculty intent to stay (Clark et al., 2013). Earlier work on incivility in nursing education described how uncivil behavior disrupts teaching and learning (Clark & Springer, 2007).
Here is what one year of that pattern cost the department in hours, using estimates the chair could check against her own calendar. Covered sections: when a junior colleague took two weeks of stress leave after a public confrontation, three colleagues covered six class sessions, about 30 hours including preparation. Mediation: the chair and an associate dean spent about 20 hours in meetings with the parties and human resources. The committee seat nobody accepts: the curriculum committee lost two members who would not serve with the senior faculty member, and the remaining members absorbed the work of redesigning a course, about 40 extra hours across three people. The search: the junior colleague resigned at the end of the year. A faculty search typically takes a committee of three to five people through position description, screening, interviews and campus visits. At a conservative estimate of 80 committee hours, plus the chair's time and the teaching coverage until a replacement arrives, the resignation alone cost more than all the other items combined. Reviews of the faculty shortage note that losing faculty is costly and that retaining them is part of the solution (Nardi & Gyurko, 2013).
Added up, one pattern of behavior moved something like 200 hours of work onto colleagues in a year, most of it onto junior faculty who already had the least time for scholarship. That is a workload problem, and it justifies the chair acting on it with the same seriousness as an unfilled course.
I am curious whether any of you have watched a department count the hours incivility costs, and did counting change what the chair did?
Reply to Stephanie
Stephanie, you argued that counting hours reduces a harm to people into a spreadsheet, and that the real cost is to the colleague who was demeaned. I agree that the human cost comes first, and I do not want the arithmetic to replace it. My point is practical: chairs often hesitate to act on behavior they see as interpersonal, but they act quickly on workload. Counting the hours gives the chair a reason to act that fits how departments make decisions, without denying that the colleague's harm is the deeper wrong.
Reply to Robert
Robert, you pushed back that the senior faculty member has tenure and the chair cannot do much. Tenure limits some actions, but it does not prevent a chair from setting behavioral expectations in writing, documenting incidents and assigning course coordination so junior faculty are not dependent on the person. Clark et al. (2013) describe strategies such as clear norms and leadership that addresses incivility directly. Counting the hours also helps if the matter reaches a formal process, because it shows effects on the department's work, not only on feelings.
References
Clark, C. M., Olender, L., Kenski, D., & Cardoni, C. (2013). Exploring and addressing faculty-to-faculty incivility: A national perspective and literature review. Journal of Nursing Education, 52(4), 211-218. https://doi.org/10.3928/01484834-20130319-01
Clark, C. M., & Springer, P. J. (2007). Incivility in nursing education: A descriptive study of definitions and prevalence. Journal of Nursing Education, 46(1), 7-14. https://doi.org/10.3928/01484834-20070101-03
Nardi, D. A., & Gyurko, C. C. (2013). The global nursing faculty shortage: Status and solutions for change. Journal of Nursing Scholarship, 45(3), 317-326. https://doi.org/10.1111/jnu.12030
What the NURS 8540 Week 9 instructions ask for
The ninth-week thread typically has you take a position on how collegial relationships among faculty affect a nursing program. Keep the opening contribution near five hundred words and follow it with two replies. Choose a narrow claim that can be defended in that space. Ground it in literature on incivility or faculty relationships and in a composite scenario rather than a real colleague. Where possible, make the effects concrete, for example in hours or tasks shifted to others. Say what a leader could do with that understanding. End with a question for the thread. In replies, grant what is right in a classmate's objection before answering it, and offer actions rather than sympathy.
How this NURS 8540 Week 9 example is built
The first paragraph states the claim. The second describes the composite department and cites Clark and colleagues and Clark and Springer. The third counts four transfers of work, from covered sessions to a faculty search, citing Nardi and Gyurko on the cost of losing faculty. A highlighted fourth paragraph totals roughly 200 hours and argues the chair should act. The question asks whether counting has changed a chair's response elsewhere. The reply to Stephanie accepts that the human harm comes first and defends the arithmetic as a lever. The reply to Robert describes written expectations, documentation and course assignments as steps a chair can take despite tenure.
NURS 8540 Week 9 rubric: what earns full marks
Discussion posts in this week are usually marked on a narrow, defended claim, use of the incivility literature, concreteness and constructive replies. A claim earns credit when it goes beyond describing incivility to explaining its consequences. Literature credit rewards sources on faculty relationships in nursing education. Concreteness is credited when effects are specific enough to act on. Replies earn credit when they engage objections respectfully and propose actions. References and prompt posting account for what remains. Instructors tend to reward posts that avoid naming real people while still making the problem vivid. Some rubrics also credit posts that estimate conservatively and show the reasoning behind each figure. Graders notice when the leadership actions are specific enough to try.
Common NURS 8540 Week 9 mistakes, and how to avoid them
Incivility posts slip when they describe bad behavior without saying what it costs or what anyone can do. Another weakness is a post drawn from a real colleague, which invites judgment of the writer rather than the argument. Some posts treat incivility only as a student issue. Others offer general advice about respect. Make a narrow claim, ground it in literature and a composite case, show concrete effects and suggest leadership actions. The desk can draft a post around the kind of department you know, kept composite. Estimate hours conservatively and show your reasoning, since a classmate who doubts one figure should still find the argument convincing. Keep the composite case general enough that no real colleague could be identified.
Get a NURS 8540 Week 9 example written to your instructions
Post over the Week 9 thread prompt, your participation rubric and any word range set for the section, and a NURS 8540 thread example arrives holding the counted argument and two replies. First custom one free, 24 to 48 hours. Incidents involving actual colleagues we neither write up nor invent around; measurement studies carry this post.
More NURS 8540 papers and DNP samples
- NURS 8540 Week 1: Faculty Retention Post
- NURS 8540 Week 2: Faculty Role Analysis Paper
- NURS 8540 Week 3: Position Description Analysis
- NURS 8540 Week 4: Faculty Workload Analysis
- NURS 8540 Week 5: Education Philosophy Statement
- NURS 8540 Week 6: Faculty Scholarship Plan
- NURS 8540 Week 7: Peer Teaching Review Memo
- NURS 8540 Week 8: Faculty Mentorship Plan
- NURS 8540 Week 10: Promotion Narrative
- NURS 8540 Week 11: Faculty Career Development Plan
- NURS 8512 Week 9: DNP Project Drift Audit
- NURS 8310 Week 9: Causal Inference Post
- NURS 8301 Week 9: Spread and Sustainment Post
- NURS 8600 Week 9: DNP final report discussion section
NURS 8540 Week 9 questions, answered
Can a thread post take a position this narrow?
Narrow is usually rewarded. Discussion rubrics at doctoral level look for a defended claim rather than coverage, and five hundred words cannot survey a literature anyway. The example narrows in its first sentence and spends the remaining space proving one thing, which is what gives the replies something specific to push against.
Should the post use an incident from my own workplace?
The example does not, and the reason is practical as well as ethical. A named incident invites the reader to assess the writer's account rather than the writer's argument, and the grade attaches to the argument. Doctoral graders also read workplace anecdote as thin evidence when instrument-based prevalence work exists and could have been cited instead.
Where can I find a free NURS 8540 Week 9 sample paper?
The incivility post and both replies, with their three references, are available here at no charge. A post about the kind of department you know can be requested.
How many hours does the NURS 8540 Week 9 post estimate incivility cost?
Roughly 200 hours in a year, from covered class sessions, mediation, absorbed committee work and a faculty search after a resignation.
What can a chair do when the senior faculty member has tenure?
Set behavioral expectations in writing, document incidents and arrange course coordination so junior faculty do not depend on that person.